32Red disgrace - TotalGambler ad

[sirius]

The email from Kate said was a joint thing with the 32Red Marketing Department and the editorial staff of the magazine. The marketing department should have checked more into it before doing the damage with this article. It puts credence into this author's book and is also likely to create compulsive gamblers to play at 32Red. Half a million copies or more were distributed.


I have found what looks like the same or very similar article (minus some parts) on the inside-edge website. 32Red is replaced by Intercasino in the article:
http://www.inside-edge-mag.co.uk/cas.../roulette.html

Here is a synopsis for the sham book he wrote: http://www.highstakespublishing.co.u...oulette_21.php

[sirius]

It looks almost a straight copy. They even mention on the inside edge site: "InterCasino.co.uk offers even-chance bets at a 50% loss only if 0 or 00 strike (the so-called Atlantic City rules). " and the Total Gambler magazine article has 32Red instead of Intercasino even though the game isn't actually available at 32Red (except for the european version with one zero).

[amandajm]

The roulette article is nonsensical, written to lure the lesser informed maybe?

Ed Ware will know better than the info in it. Would have pulled it if he saw it I hope and believe.

Of course Ed is ultimately responsible for his staff's actions. However, I am loathe to rogue a good enough casino operator simply because decent staff are hard to come by.

If such ads carry on, now it has been brought to the public eye in the right place, Ed and therefore 32red will be to blame because the article is indeed a wanton misrepresentation of the facts, or the inane babblings of a wolly. I lean towards the former.

Hopefully Ed will drop the campaign, or check each apparent fact presented by this author.

[JohnGalt]

This ad is indeed completely disgraceful, and I would like to hear what Ed Ware has to say about it. Certainly will and should hurt their image as a responsible casino. However, they still have excellent customer service and pay out promptly, so I would still recommend them to people. I guess you're attempting to punish them for this, admittedly slimy, thing they've done. But by doing so, aren't you also harming your site users by steering them away from a good casino to play at? Everyone over at 32red could be complete bastards, but as long as their #1 priority is good customer service, I would still play there.

[johnsteed]

JohnGalt

But by doing so, aren't you also harming your site users by steering them away from a good casino to play at? Everyone over at 32red could be complete bastards, but as long as their #1 priority is good customer service, I would still play there.

Great point!

If this article was about almost any other casino, I doubt anyone would really care. I guess when your reputation is as sterling as 32Red's, there's somebody waiting to pick-you-apart and criticize the tiniest of things. While it may be a mistake, who would really want to stop going there (unless you're unlucky and ALWAYS losing)? They will still offer great customer service, they will ALWAYS pay the customer, and they will always try to improve and make the casino more player-friendly (my belief anyways). How are they making it better (or have made it better)? Posting their personal photos on their website (no guns and thugs there). Club Rouge (as I'm sure some are rolling there eyes... but if you're in, it's wonderful). How about incorporating players/webmasters ideas like the ongoing progressive tournament? These are all pluses. All great casino's slip-up from time-to-time, although I'm not convinced that 32Red truly did screw-up in this particular case. In any case, I'm sure they're on top of this one, and are likely NOT to make the same mistake twice.

rudepete

They know I am the unsaid player. yikes stripes
I always wanted to be an unknown comic, does it show???????

Hahaha... I wasn't sure if you were ready to go public yet.

While I dig the new costume (Santa), and while it IS the Christmas season (shopping-wise), I miss the bear already. To me, the bear makes the name rudepete authentic (I guess you'll be maintaining that "jolly" image though). I would say the same when KasinoKing used to be the fat-man in the tux, Spearmaster used to be the devil, or when Slotchik used to be Mrs. Jetson. I guess I have to accept change sometimes.

[tim5ny]

While I'm not a roulette player, anyone one with half a brain can understand that each spin of the wheel is totally independant and unrelated to the previous and forthcoming spins as opposed to BJ games where you have a certain number of value cards in the deck which allows the schooled player to determine what his/her odds are on what the next card is more likely to be. I've not read the article mentioned on roulette frankly because my input has more to do with the backlash that 32Red is receiving for an article that was written by an "expert" that may or may not have collaberated with the 32Red team on its content. I'm assuming that this person understands the game far better than the average player would, and I would also assume that through his experiences he would have learned a few things that might be helpful to pass on to fellow players. An "expert" ( I don't know how you can be an expert in a game of chance, but let's call him a player with alot of experience) knows where the numbers are located on the wheel in relation to each other, ans therefore might be able to give some advice on certain bet combinations that work well together to cover the wheel in a more balanced way so as to cut losses. This would be helpful for the beginner. Knowing the staff at 32Red, I'm certain that there is no deceit intended by them in asking this man to contribute an article in a publication based on a subject that he knows better than most people. Just as Patsy Kensit is used in promotions as a celebrity dealer or spokesperson, I'm sure the only intentions of 32Red were to promote their games by using a well known author who has published a book or two on the subject. I think you're on a witch hunt here, and you're assuming that there are underlying motives behind an article which was merely meant for entertainment and maybe some insight into how the game works. If you throw 32Red out as corrupt, then you may as well just close up shop and pursue another vocation because it is well known that they are a very respectable and trusted group.

[Slotmachine]

Lynch me if you will, but I thought for the most part the article made sense. It suggested that you should stick to your budget, not play with more than you can afford to lose, not chase losses, and mentioned the risk that exists with credit cards, i.e. betting more than you can afford to. I don't see it as promoting gambling addiction - addicts are unlikely to be interested in this sort of disciplined gambling.

Apart from these, the strategy sounded OK to me, pretty much the same I employ in slots. Lower my bets when I'm losing and increase my bet size when I'm winning. It's not a winning strategy, but it makes your money last longer (compared to betting big all the time), and makes large wins possible (compared to low-rolling all the time).

Of course, the Roulette theory section was a load of bollocks as we all know. Even the author admits that there's no mathematical logic to it. The only scenario where following the wheel might theoretically work would be if there is indeed a spinner/wheel bias which I think is, while unlikely, entirely possible in B&M casinos. Hey, even supposedly unbreakable one-time crypto pads have been broken because of such bias - where human action influences chance and therefore the game ceases to be random and that's when patterns emerge and may become visible to the trained eye. And I'm saying theoretically.

But I think mountains are being made out of molehills here.

It says something about 32Red that the only complaints to emerge on this forum about them are that they've published a silly but harmless ad, and that some players have had unlucky streaks there.

But I see the ad is working, no?

Cheers,
Slotmachine

[sirius]

The problem with these sham articles if they are well enough written is that some people will not see through it, otherwise it probably wouldn't have got published in that magazine as the editor wouldn't have allowed it (strange as it may sound, this magazine is usually fine).

The inside-edge site also has the article but previously had an honest roulette article the year before (also named a 'masterclass'). To suggest knowing the wheel or practising his methods can make sure you win more than lose in the long run, is completely false as none of that makes a difference to whether you win or lose overall. Anyone can beat the odds for a long time but that is down to pure luck and is the reason why people gamble in the first place.

I take on board what some of you have said but this ad certainly did cause a lot of harm as it was widely read and is totally misleading and a complete recipe for compulsive gamblers and I suspect the author knows it is crap.

According to someone who emailed me some months ago who has done a LOT of research into problem gambling, Nigel Turner :

The main risk factors for gambling addiction appear to be:
1) impulsivity (including ADHD and related disorders)
2) negative moods (depression, anxiety, stressful life experiences)
3) early wins and big wins
4) erroneous beliefs about the nature or random chance.

The article is likely to cause you to win quite often as the author recommends aiming for a a small percentage each time. It also explains that with practise you can win more than you lose which is false. This makes half of the risk factors Nigel gave for compulsive gamblers already (for anyone believing the article).

His email also explains it in this way:

But "knowing the odds" does not protect a person from an addiction... It's more understanding the independence of random events. Pathological gamblers tend to know the odds of winning, but believe they can beat the odds.

I would like a response from 32Red on here.

[Ed Ware]

Dear All

Please excuse my late response to the point brought up by Sirius. Unfortunately I have been out of the office on business but have now reviewed the article, our correspondence with Sirius, and the thread here at Casinomeister.

I think the most important point to clear up first of all, is the independence of the content of the article in the Total Gambler magazine. The copy is written entirely by Mr Morton with the publishers dropping in our name at certain points in the story. As Sirius has already noted, where the article has featured elsewhere, the publishers have replaced our name with that of another operator. I think this confirms the origins of the content beyond question.

The next issue is whether the content of the piece itself is irresponsible. As Spearmaster correctly points out we are in the hands of the editor by associating our name with such an article. That said, we would only want to be associated with articles that are well written, balanced in their content and in no way misrepresent the facts of the subject matter in hand. Equally, 32Red subscribes to industry best practice in that we only wish to promote gambling in a responsible manner. To this extent we adhere to the advertising guidelines promoted by GamCare. These guidelines include not targeting under 18’s, ensuring that the advert gives a balanced message of the chances of winning, players are not encouraged to chase any losses and that gambling is not promoted as a way of solving financial problems. Taken in isolation some of the text could be construed as unhelpful, but overall the article is balanced and features plenty of good advice. The article is littered with cautionary notes, for example:

• Set modest win targets and tight loss limits
• Fix a budget you can afford and stick to it
• Don’t carry cash you don’t really want to risk
• Don’t top up your lost money with visits to cash points
• Take a tip from the casinos: they don’t lose….

This article is advocating a disciplined approach which we believe would not be attractive to susceptible individuals. However, whilst I am disappointed that this thread is unfairly attacking our reputation as an operator of integrity, I have to say that as an industry we should encourage everyone to take steps to keep away from irresponsible activity. 32Red Plc is licensed by the Government of Gibraltar (British Overseas Territory) and publicly listed on the London Stock Exchange. We actively support GamCare and the team here have had the benefit of training delivered by their online gambling expert. I was proud of the feedback this expert in Responsible Gambling gave me having spent a couple of days with us listening to how we treat these sensitive issues, and helping us to improve still further. Pat Harrison, who many of you know, is the Chairman of our Responsible Gaming Committee (which is also made up by our Non Executive Directors). The function of this group is entirely to police our actions and plans in relation to our social responsibilities. In short, we take this subject extremely seriously.

Unfortunately Sirius was given incorrect information about our involvement in the article for which I apologise. We also failed to respond to a further email from him on this subject. Again, that is not good enough and not what Sirius and, I’m sure, others expect from 32Red. Nevertheless we have sent Sirius a Private Message through this forum (on Friday of last week) with the facts which unfortunately haven’t been reflected in his subsequent post. I am guessing that he hasn’t got to his inbox.

I would like to thank all those of you who have made the effort to make mention of our overall service and standing in the industry. Whilst some of the comments in this thread are painful (even if we do dispute them), it is extremely encouraging to everyone here in Gibraltar that our mission to be the best (if not necessarily the biggest) online casino and poker operator are not going unnoticed.

Kind regards

Ed Ware
CEO
32Red Plc

[thelawnet]

The next issue is whether the content of the piece itself is irresponsible. As Spearmaster correctly points out we are in the hands of the editor by associating our name with such an article. That said, we would only want to be associated with articles that are well written, balanced in their content and in no way misrepresent the facts of the subject matter in hand. Equally, 32Red subscribes to industry best practice in that we only wish to promote gambling in a responsible manner. To this extent we adhere to the advertising guidelines promoted by GamCare. These guidelines include not targeting under 18’s, ensuring that the advert gives a balanced message of the chances of winning, players are not encouraged to chase any losses and that gambling is not promoted as a way of solving financial problems. Taken in isolation some of the text could be construed as unhelpful, but overall the article is balanced and features plenty of good advice. The article is littered with cautionary notes, for example:

• Set modest win targets and tight loss limits
• Fix a budget you can afford and stick to it
• Don’t carry cash you don’t really want to risk
• Don’t top up your lost money with visits to cash points
• Take a tip from the casinos: they don’t lose….

This article is advocating a disciplined approach which we believe would not be attractive to susceptible individuals

I believe I already binned the magazine in question, and while I understand as a PR exercise you want to accentuate the positive, I can't really see why you spend so much time defending the article, when you have already said it was not your editorial.

The article's central premise was that you can beat the house at roulette, and you haven't really dissociated yourself from this untrue claim.

However, whilst I am disappointed that this thread is unfairly attacking our reputation as an operator of integrity, I have to say that as an industry we should encourage everyone to take steps to keep away from irresponsible activity.

So why not just say that the article was wrong, that you didn't read it before publication, and you apologise for any misinformation spread.